You would think with the Dems in control of the White House and the Senate that their mouthpieces in the MSM could afford to work on building their veneer of impartiality. It would appear, however, that the electoral results of 2010 have them just frightened enough that they are screechier and nastier than ever. There were two memes that dominated the week just past – the week in which Mitt Romney formally launched his campaign – and both were coldly calculated to torpedo Republicans and especially those seeking the White House in 2012. Let’s start with our little pet at the blog…

The Romney Religion Meme

“If he didn’t have his experience from last time, particularly with the prism of the media, which does not like Mitt Romney or root for Mitt Romney in the way most Republican and Democratic nominees have.”

We could debate the “most Republicans” aspect of that for a while, but lets take it at face value. The media is agreeing that Romney has the media against him. Therefore, everything that we read has to be viewed through such a prism – especially when it comes to the religion question.

To some extent, the media coverage this week has been refreshing. The nastiness we discussed last week did echo a bit. But this go around is very different than last time. We are not seeing the right questioning Romney’s faith. Instead we are seeing what we expected last time – the left trying to use it as a wedge to divide Republicans and retain the White House for of the least popular presidents in history. (The FAR left just used itto beat their drums – to champion their causes – forgive my previous metaphor, it was unintentionally racist.) Two pieces rose to the fore in this category this week.

Clearly the LATimes is trying to make something true that simply is not true. We do not have the Robert Novaks quoting highly placed Evangelical sources. We do not have NRO and other right leaning sources endlessly discussing the issue, we have instead the least read major newspaper in American trying to make a story. (And trying.) Given the LAT’s declining circulation, I wonder whether by linking to it we have not created a significant bump? One writer called Rutten an “Historical Idiot.”

The other piece that took the forefront came the next day and was Dan Gilgoff at CNN. Not nasty as Rutten, the Gilgoff piece is just more of the same old yada,yada,yada – it flat out did not need to be written save to raise the issue when there is not much discussion of it. Gilgoff was not the only one doing this kind of stuff – some guy at the Washington Times did a similar piece, quoting an Iowa source. Look it is an issue in Iowa (how do you think Huckabee rose to prominence?) but that does not mean it is an issue for the election generally. The CSM got in on the act as well, but being viewed as “a cult” themselves, the Christian Scientists have a dog in the hunt.

Well, certainly there are some people out there that want some one other than who is in the field. Either they are serious backers of the subjects of the rumors, or they are just malcontents. But the fact of the matter is there are not enough of them out there to make a difference. In truth, these people, at least the ones that have serious political capabilities, have decided not to run because they have looked at things and know they do not have enough support to get anywhere. But true believers are true believers, so they are going to keep trying. One of the ways they do that is by calling up the press and generating buzz. What I can’t believe is the press is gullible enough to fall for it.

But, as we have established, the press is interested in aiding the Dems. So if they can establish this meme, they divide Republicans and one of the least popular presidents in history stands a reasonable shot at reelection. Which raises the question about who is really gullible?

That’s what makes this meme so despicable.

Which brings me to Rudy Giuliani. The rumors persist and Rudy is helping. Giuliani is a real American political hero, and what happened last cycle is a shame, but he chose the losing strategy and now he has to pay his campaign debts. I just wish he could figure out a way to do so without this sort of nonsense. We need a strong an united Republican party. It’s not helping.

Speaking of “Unhappy With The Field”…

The Faith and Freedom Event was this weekend just past. Here is the CBN analysis. This was a Ralph Reed event. Does it represent a comeback for him? Only timer will tell, but what it does show us is that the Religious Right has gotten a lot smarter. There was no Mormon bashing (at least reported to date.) There was no divisiveness, there was a simple attempt to get at the stances of the candidates on the issues key to this coalition. This is is noted contrast to the religious coverage of ROmney noted above. It is also worthy of note that this thing has gotten almost no press.

There were hundreds, if not thousands of people at this event, all behaving – having a civil discussion about things religious and political. Compare that the the handful, literally, of sources cited in all that coverage we gave above about Romney and religion. Seriously, there are only about 4-5 people that produced all the quotes in all those articles. Meanwhile the FandF event has gotten the minimum coverage that can be given to an event where virtually all of the players showed up.

Once again, we see the press playing up the division, and ignoring the truth on the ground, all in an effort to portray Republicans as something other than they are. We need to redoucble our efforts to paint the true picture.

The Rest Of The Field

Sarah Palin is NOT a candidate, despite what somepeople may think. Even when she sorta, kinda tries to sound like one, she is missing the mark. Sadly, her and Huckabee, both of whom have made a living out of being “possibles” these last few years are going to find that avenue closed as the field solidifies and it becomes apparent that they are not in it. Right now, both seem to be reduced to stunts – Huckabee and his comments linked above (“no door is closed”) and Palin and her bus tour. What they should be doing in consolidating their audience into a sold fan base and turning themselves into pure media figures. It is time to drop the pretense. Yeah, the competition is tough in the commentary business, but they’ll be fine.

Most interesting is that he is saying nice things about Michelle Bachmann, but she is not returning the favor. This really makes me wonder about Bachmann’s reasons for getting in. Could there be a personal beef involved? We have seen this game played before. Mike Huckabee, not a chance of winning nor a friend of anybody but Mike Huckabee, played Iowa specifically to rob Romney of momentum last time. Pawlenty finds himself prohibitively behind in the polling in New Hampshire and therefore needing Iowa in the worst way to attract enough attention to keep the campaign rolling. Bachmann fits nicely in the Huckabee/Iowa mold and could have the same effect on the Pawlenty campaign. Watch this space.

“We will be competing vigorously here [New Hampshire], and in South Carolina and in Florida, but we probably won’t be spending a whole lot of time in Iowa,” he said. “I guess I understand how the politics work there.”

OK, skipping Iowa makes a lot of sense for him, as it does for Romney, and for the same reasons – But South Carolina?! Either he thinks Pawlenty or Bachmann are unbeatable in Iowa, or he is going for a modified Giuliani strategy. Well, we saw how things worked for Rudy last time….

Newt Gingrich is losinggroundfast. Another week or two of this and I’ll start placing bets that he is out BEFORE the caucuses.

Important Religious/Court Story…

The Obama administration is using the NRLB to attack more than Boeing on behalf of their union buddies. I am getting visions of Senator Palpatine and his ranting about bureaucrats before he became emperor. Do you think Obama is a Star Wars fanboy?

Wise Words in closing…

Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour issued a stern warning to conservatives Friday: relent on ideological purity in the primaries or risk losing the general election.

“We’re going to nominate someone for president who doesn’t agree with you on everything and who you don’t agree with on everything,” Barbour said. “But I’ll tell you what. You’re going to agree with them a whole lot more than you agree with Barack Obama.”

If they don’t, Barbour warned, they’ll play right into the Democrats’ hands.

“Barack Obama has worn out two sets of knee pads, down on his knees praying that conservatives are going to split themselves,” he said.

I think he’s been reading this blog!

Lowell adds . . .

Well, John and I really did think that if Romney ran in 2011 his religion would be a subject of much less interest. Now we see the cover of this week’s issue of Newsweek:

How many times have I said on this blog, “Where to begin?”

Let’s try our oft-used context test: Imagine Joseph Lieberman, when he was a presidential candidate, dressed as a Hasidic rabbi and jumping for joy on Newsweek’s cover. Can’t do it, can you?

On the other hand, part of me wonders if this isn’t a perversely good sign. I have always thought “The Book of Mormon” musical was a left-handed compliment, and perhaps a recognition that Mormonism has reached a place of cultural acceptance that makes it old hat to ridicule the faith. Yes, I know we can all think of other ways in which we would know we have “arrived.” But maybe we are like Catholics or Presbyterians — and even Jews — who are regularly satirized on shows like Letterman.

Also, having read all the articles in this issue of Newsweek, there’s nothing terribly offensive in the content. There are the usual minor inaccuracies and the gum-popping effort to put a glitzy spin on the article: Subtitled “Mormons Rock!” the article’s teaser sub-headline is“They’ve conquered Broadway, talk radio, the U.S. Senate-and they may win the White House. Why Mitt Romney and 6 million Mormons have the secret to success.”

Oh, please. The secret to success? I’m one Mormon who needs a little help with that one, I guess, especially at bill-paying time.

But on the still other hand, I agree with John’s assessment, e-mailed to me: “Nothing new, nothing deep, just claptrap, but the image and tone say it all.” Of course I understand that McKay Coppins and his colleagues at Newsweek seem to be trying to write something newsy and interesting, but for heaven’s sake, Mitt Romney is running for president of the United States. Isn’t there more to him than his religion? And if we have to talk about his faith, can’t we do that in something approaching a respectful manner? That cover photo is in many ways the equivalent of showing Barack Obama in Kenyan tribal robes in a jocular attempt to call attention to his African ancestry.

Mollie Hemingway at GetReligion commented on the Newsweek cover as well, comparing and contrasting in a way that, in my opinion at least, connects some important dots:

The irony of the whole package is killing me. The “Book of Mormon,” which, again is apparently a very good musical from the creators of South Park, is an entirely New York phenomenon. It mocks general religious belief using Mormon characters. It’s made by media elites (media elites who I generally like, admittedly) and enjoyed by a class of people who go to Broadway musical. So somehow that’s not Romney’s problem — even when it means his head gets photoshopped on a poster from the musical. No, his problem is those backward Iowans and South Carolinians, you dig?